From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Aug 19 03:25:17 2003
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3BD416A4BF
	for <current@freebsd.org>; Tue, 19 Aug 2003 03:25:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (critter.freebsd.dk [212.242.86.163])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C563343F85
	for <current@freebsd.org>; Tue, 19 Aug 2003 03:25:16 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from phk@phk.freebsd.dk)
Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by critter.freebsd.dk (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h7JAPBlX046804;
	Tue, 19 Aug 2003 12:25:13 +0200 (CEST)
	(envelope-from phk@phk.freebsd.dk)
To: Munehiro Matsuda <haro@h4.dion.ne.jp>
From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 14 Aug 2003 20:56:49 +0900."
             <20030814.205649.71088058.haro@h4.dion.ne.jp> 
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2003 12:25:11 +0200
Message-ID: <46803.1061288711@critter.freebsd.dk>
cc: current@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: DEVFS related message 
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2003 10:25:18 -0000

In message <20030814.205649.71088058.haro@h4.dion.ne.jp>, Munehiro Matsuda writ
es:
>Hi All,
>
>I just got following DEVFS related message with
>this mornings current.
>
>DEVFS Overflow table with 32768 entries allocated when 925 in use
>
>Anybody seen this?

This is mostly harmless.

When DEVFS initially was integrated the locking situation was rather
tricky and malloc failures therefor not easy to handle.  Therefore
DEVFS uses a compile time array of pointers to its inodes.

If this table seems to be running out, (less than 100 free entries)
an "overflow" table will be attempted allocated which can contain
more entries.

You can adjust both the regular and the overflow table sizes with
compile time constants NDEVFSINO and NDEVFSOVERFLOW.

When more of the kernel has been de-Giantized, this code can be
revisited and these constants can probably be eliminated.

-- 
Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe    
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.